On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 05:43:42PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Changes:
> zlib (1:1.1.4-6) unstable; urgency=low
> .
> * Depend on libc-dev rather than libc6-dev (closes: #164649).
>
> So of course this package is going to be uninstallable now, just like openssl
> was a few days ago.
>
> openssl (0.9.6g-8) unstable; urgency=low
> .
> * fix libc6 depends. Only needed for i386 (closes: #163701)
> * remove SHLIB section for bsds from Configure (closes: #163585)
>
> openssl (0.9.6g-9) unstable; urgency=low
> .
> * fix typo in i386 libc6 depend (sigh) (closes: #163848)
>
> DO NOT DECLARE SIMPLE DEPENDENCIES ON PURE VIRTUAL PACKAGES.
>
> In Debian GNU/Linux, "libc-dev" is a pure virtual package. It doesn't
> matter if "libc-dev" is a real package on GNU/Hurd or *BSD. You will
> break Debian GNU/Linux if you tell people to change "libc6-dev"
> dependencies to "libc-dev".
>
> WHAT YOU SHOULD DO INSTEAD:
>
> Depends: libc6-dev | libc-dev
>
> This also helps the Alpha and IA-64 GNU/Linux ports, where the dev
> package for GNU LibC is "libc6.1-dev".
>
> DEPENDING ON A VIRTUAL PACKAGE IS FINE, BUT YOU SHOULD *ALWAYS* SPECIFY
> A REAL PACKAGE ALTERNATIVE, AND IT SHOULD *ALWAYS* COME FIRST.
>
> REAL BEFORE VIRTUAL.
>
> Learn it, live it, love it.
>
> Oh yeah, by the way...
>
> I WOULDN'T HAVE TO SHOUT LIKE THIS IF PACKAGE MAINTAINERS COULD BE
> BOTHERED TO PERFORM EVEN THE MEAGER TESTING THAT "dpkg -i" ENTAILS.
>
> TEST BEFORE YOU UPLOAD.
1) As said on IRC... I stand corrected, and will attempt to avoid
encouraging mistakes in the future (once I can hear again).
2) Is this a libc6 special case, or would it be just as acceptable to list,
say, "libc12-dev | libc-dev"?
3) If the answer to #2 is 'no', can someone explain to me, in private, why
pure virtual dependancies are bad, then? They seem like the obvious answer,
so if they're not, I'd like to understand why. (note #1, above, and that
this is a request for enlightenment, not an argument).
--
***************************************************************************
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/